Does everyone shoot shoulder mount?

Rick Burnett

Rick Burnett

Section Moderator
90% of the photos I see on here are people shooting shoulder mount. I thought, okay, I've not really shot a lot of shoulder mount so let me try it. I've been through 2 iterations of shoulder mount setup and the honest truth is I just don't like it. Given I am 6'4" most people are shorter than me. This means for almost every shot, the camera is pointing down a bit. If I get down on a knee or knees, then I am stuck in that one position.

When I see a lot of film set shots, I see the camera either on a tripod, or, they've got it on a crane/dolly system that is typically pretty crazy.

When I used to shoot with my 7D, I used a blackbird stabilizer. I have to tell you, this combination was absolutely amazing. EVERY person who I've taught to use the setup has just been amazed at the freedom in shooting so they get more dynamic shots. Because the camera is right in front of me, my arms work raising and lowering, and I can track and rotate very well with the system.

Then I bought the FS100 (and before that the AF100).

These cameras are just a bit too heavy to hold out in front of you all day long. (The AF100 more so) and because both camera are longer, the weight distribution at the top isn't as good to me with the Blackbird.

I've spent DAYS thinking about this. I know when we shot with the HVX200 that we'd use the top handle for lower shots, and cradle the camera for midlevel shots. And of course, hand held for higher shots.

With the FS100 and AF100, I don't know why, but handheld with the built-in/attachable grips just feel off. The weight is all wrong on the FS100. On the AF100, the lack of articulation in the grip prevents me from using it at different camera heights.

I've been thinking of using my Berkey pieces (with some additional ones) to build a bunch of different grip points around the camera to help with holding it. Making it so I can change the grip location based on center of gravity AND the grip orientation to deal with the axis of rotation relative to my movements.

Some people have used a camera strap to help stabilize when running with the camera lower. I also considered if a chest pad in the back would help.

Has ANYONE gone down this path? If you need to shoot a mid level (think camera at stomach) shot where you need to move around, what do you do? Any ideas would be GREATLY appreciated.
 
Rick Burnett said:
Has ANYONE gone down this path? If you need to shoot a mid level (think camera at stomach) shot where you need to move around, what do you do? Any ideas would be GREATLY appreciated.
Click to expand...

Rent a Steadicam! Or, better yet, a Steadicam Operator :D

But if that's not an option...what I do is just hold my rigs by the top handle and pull focus with an 18" whip. It's a little heavy, but it works, especially if I keep moving. Standing still starts to wear on my wrist, but if I'm tracking low with someone - or just shooting a short person - I've found that staying in motion uses the camera's inertia to stabilize it very well.

I'll see if I can post a picture of my setup. I've done this with 7D's, EX-1's, and F3's on my rig - ranging from 15 to 25 pounds.
 
I shoot 90% on a tripod or slider. Only go shoulder or stabilizer when there is a really good reason to do so. However, I only shoot narrative and music videos, VERY rarely any type of event stuff.
 
Rick Burnett said:
90% of the photos I see on here are people shooting shoulder mount.
Click to expand...

I think the logic goes something like this.

You know the 30 degree rule where the shot should be taken from a different location from the shot before ? (of course rules are for breaking)

So simply you need to reposition the camera every shot to make a nice sequence that fits traditional shooting rules and don't jump cut

Now if you are in a hurry (like covering an event) you would not have time to move your sticks - let alone some sort of dolly/jib whatever

SO you need a feet based camera support sytem

Thats in the main shoulder mount or a stabiliser

Now stabilisers are hard to hold a lock off, difficult to pull focus, and you can't quickly move a stabiliser rigged camera to a tripod

So the only option left is handheld/shoulder mount - that why people do it to get a quick sequence that cuts well.

Of course why people would do handheld in narrative is basically bonkers becuase they have time to stop the world while the camera support system is moved to the new location

To me handheld in narrative is just choice/style and way overused

As for shooting with a good eyerline when you are 6.4 (as am I) tricky with a long camera - I guess just ben ze knees

ANd shooting waistheight/lomode - loads of options with top handle etc you just need to find what works for you ?

SamMM
 
Yeah some kind of cage or even a super cheap chinese rig with a top handle would work for that waist level stuff.

The main reasons you see so much handheld in narrative these days are
1. Laziness
2. Lack of knowledge of how to plan and shoot proper coverage
3. Laziness
4. The trendy idea that the camera floating all over the place somehow makes the shot more "dynamic".
5. Laziness
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
The main reasons you see so much handheld in narrative these days are
2. Lack of knowledge of how to plan and shoot proper coverage
4. The trendy idea that the camera floating all over the place somehow makes the shot more "dynamic".
Click to expand...
Even if I agree with the laziness parts, #2 is probably right but told as "a different approach" in framing the shots, and #4 is exactly the goal, making them more dynamic. Talking about handheld and shoulder mounted shots, I started to watch Blue Bloods with Tim Selleck yesterday and the first episode was kind of stopping me because of that...too much and there's no purpose of doing such camera work...doesn't add anything. I prefer some nice framing and a more polished camera work instead.
 
I've seen one guy who was also tall set up a shoulder rig so that the camera was below his shoulders while the rig was still resting on his shoulder.
Most people set it up at eye level of the operator but adjusting it to be lower than usual is what (in your case) should be done.
 
I'd say the problem I generally see with handheld is they don't do it smoothly, and I feel the cameras do not lend themselves well to doing smooth hand held shots. When I look at the FS100/AF100 (and other video cameras of the past) I see a trend where they tried to copy the broadcast mentality of having your right hand hold the camera, but of course, it lacks the shoulder support and really tweaks the wrist if you aren't supporting the camera with the other hand. At least for me.

I also don't think it's just laziness to shoot hand held, it's easier to be on sticks or using a shoulder mount. I've used both. What I don't like about being on the sticks is I can't track. There are shots where I want to track people and move around. I do this smoothly and it looks great.

I've been watching a lot of old films on netflix lately and honestly, a lot of older films have more camera movement (smoothly) then a lot of films I see today. I'll see these lengthy shots where the camera is moving around the set and it is fantastic.

Being 6'4", I've definitely bent the knee when I've been using the FS100. It has worked and has been the best solution so far, it just doesn't feel as comfortable to shoot, and, it means I am like a human tripod :) Since I am on my knees I cannot move.

I think using a steadicam is really the only REAL solution to solve all the problems, because that's what I was doing with the blackbird. It's a lot more cost and a lot more setup and work to use it, and it makes me a larger footprint when I shoot.

This is why I like a light camera and the 7D was the perfect weight. The FS100 is just a bit too heavy, although doable. Maybe I just need to beef up my shooting arm more :P

I also think some handles around the camera would really help. Handles dedicated to different shooting heights and different points of articulation relative to my body.

In any case, I'm glad to hear what others think. I've asked this before. I am NOT a traditional shooter. I work with a SMALL group and we are very dynamic. My camera setup can switch from tripod to shoulder mount to crane (provided crane is set up) to monopod mount in just seconds. My camera is ALWAYS on a Manfrotto plate and my DP6 is on the 16x9 fast switch adapter.

I've spent a little time at the CMR facility (who make the blackbird) to discuss floating the FS100 easier. I also used the Blackbird with a vest and it does work (and really well). It's really not any problem of the blackbird, just a problem with the weight of the cam and the functionality of MY arms :)

I'd love to see some shots of people holding their rigs chest or waist high.
 
DDirector said:
I've seen one guy who was also tall set up a shoulder rig so that the camera was below his shoulders while the rig was still resting on his shoulder.
Most people set it up at eye level of the operator but adjusting it to be lower than usual is what (in your case) should be done.
Click to expand...

I may need to retry this.

I did it once, but I had the camera too far forward and I didn't have enough weight to balance that much camera that forward. I think if I get the camera to about 5'7 to 5'10 (with testing) it might work out better for those conditions.

I also think if my shoulder rig JUST has handles and shoulder part, and attach everything else to the camera, it will be even faster to switch.

Testing, testing, testing.

Let me ask this. I am thinking about getting more blocks/rods/handles from Berkey so I can put handles in more locations. Any other companies I should consider? The Berkey stuff is GREAT and SOLID, I just want to make sure I am considering anything I might not be at the moment.
 
"I've been watching a lot of old films on netflix lately and honestly, a lot of older films have more camera movement (smoothly) then a lot of films I see today"

They are using jibs, cranes, dollies, sliders, smooth perfect pan/follows from the sticks, etc... I LOVE camera movement. I just don't care much for handheld.

Also, there is a HUGE difference between a real "Steadicam" operated by a $1500 a day operator and what we refer to on these forums as a "steadicam" which is slightly improved handheld.

I throw "laziness" out there because I often think that really is what's going on. The choice between "I can make this scene dynamic by going handheld and just following the action" and "I can make this scene dynamic by shooting carefully planned coverage for the next 3 hours and creating the dynamism via editing, CREATING the action".
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
Yeah some kind of cage or even a super cheap chinese rig with a top handle would work for that waist level stuff.

The main reasons you see so much handheld in narrative these days are
1. Laziness
2. Lack of knowledge of how to plan and shoot proper coverage
3. Laziness
4. The trendy idea that the camera floating all over the place somehow makes the shot more "dynamic".
5. Laziness
Click to expand...

I would substitute the word "realistic" for "dynamic" in #4. The purpose of shooting handheld was originally to mimic the look of shaky TV news footage and somehow give the impression that the shooter is a witness to an ongoing real-life event rather than a staged scene on a set. That may work in small doses but the illusion is blown when everybody starts doing it. Heck, there's even some backlash from those of us who are ENG/event shooters -- nowadays, I'm more inclined to use a tripod to distance my stuff from that handheld mess that everybody's using.

For some brilliant use of the handheld camera, re-watch the scenes inside the B-52 toward the end of "Dr. Strangelove." The stuff where James Earl Jones is desperately flipping switches to get the bomb bay to open and Slim Pickens goes "downstairs" to kick it loose is just awesome, shot handheld in contrasty, grainy B&W with big practical light sources flaring into the lens all over the place. My talent was never any threat to Kubrick's, but this is one of the movies that inspired me to get into the business, and developing handheld skills on a par with those was always one of my goals.

- Greg
 
No doubt, it can be the right choice and can be done brilliantly. It just seems to have become a cheap excuse for everybody who doesn't want to learn how to frame a nice shot and shoot proper coverage.

or as the guy in Salon put it in his very nice rant...

"Simply put, this crap is transparently cynical and opportunistic and has become totally played-out since 1999′s “The Blair Witch Project,” arguably the hit that made home video panic-cam an official, approved technique in mainstream productions. Twelve years later, directors who keep treating it as an aesthetic security blanket — especially at the big-budget level — should be required to get a tattoo across their foreheads that reads “Hack.” Get yourself a tripod. Make a shot list. Think about where you’re putting the camera and why you’re putting it there, and try to redirect the audience’s attention by moving the camera or refocusing rather than cutting every three to five seconds. Stop covering action. Start directing again."
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
"
I throw "laziness" out there because I often think that really is what's going on. The choice between "I can make this scene dynamic by going handheld and just following the action" and "I can make this scene dynamic by shooting carefully planned coverage for the next 3 hours and creating the dynamism via editing, CREATING the action".
Click to expand...

I second laziness.

Just talked to a bunch of film students, all DSLR shooters. Those guys are totally spoiled by their tiny cameras.
They never been out with an ENG team in the old Digibeta days, not to even mention on a normal film set.

All I heard was,:

""ohmygawd, so much gear to schlep around, that´s too much - I just want the camera and maybe two lenses, better only one 16-200 mm zoom"
Sticks are much to heavy, if I work alone, how should I handle all the stuff.?"
"All that gear is slowing me down", " This ( carbon tripod and lens bag) is all to heavy and cumbersome for me"
"I want to move quickly, a shoulder cam is way to heavy and exhausting for this kind of work"

And my favorite: " I have only a bike, I don´t want a car because of the CO2 footprint. So how do you think should I transport all this gear on a bike?" .

Yeah, so this is the "new breed" and coming generation of film makers.
For me there are only a few occasions where I would consider handheld/shoulder.

1. I am not able to get the shot otherwise.
2. It´s a thigh fighting or escaping scene (think Private Ryan invasion or Seven)
3. The audience shall "see" through someones eyes.
4. Faking ENG style (Cloverfield).

For every other situation, IMHO shoulder/handheld plays the camera much to much in the foreground and throws the audience out of the story - it´s like "hey look, we have a camera here".
Making the camera so prominent and spectacular, is something that is done on ether cheap student films (where the DP doesn´t care or even know how to get a better shot), or on Dogma films, which is one reason I hate them.

It´s also about the craft-everyone and my granma can do a shaky handheld Dogma shot, but only a Pro can do that same shot without shaking.
So yeah, laziness of not practicing and calling it an art-form instead.

Having said that, I use a steadicam if I have to move around (especially at belly hight), or I put it on the shoulder, if I absolutely have to.
But than I try to do my very best, that I keep it as stable as possible.

My new TILTA rig has a nice shoulder pad right under the camera and is well balanced. Also I can mount the hand grips all over the cage for awkward situations, if I need to.
But actually I feel much more comfortable on sticks, crane, dolly.



Frank
 
Last edited:
For the past couple of years I`ve been using a Manfrotto FigRig ( and Mini HaloRig for my GH-2 ) and a Manfrotto 561BHDV-1 video monopod when I go handheld. Both work well, but you have to have a wired focus/iris controller or somebody to handle these for you when using the FigRig/HaloRig.

I recently figured out how to properly mount the HaloRig to the Manfrotto video monopod, and plan to use it on a job next week.

For shoulder mounts, the only one I`ve ever liked is the bloody expensive Zacuto one. ( it`s the only one that I can properly balance, so that most of the camera rig weight is off my arms )
 
Frank, I do love that shoulder pad. I've not heard back from them yet though I did inquire about that part. I REALLY like that part.

I guess the problem is that I don't want the shaky cam, because I can't stand that either, and when I was doing hand held with the AF100 and later FS100, it just wasn't stable enough for me.

I admit, the 7D introduced me to a whole new world of shooting with the Blackbird Stabilizer and, honestly, I loved it. Our shots are smooth, our tracking is great. I got to the point I could track even with my lens at F1.4 and keep in focus almost always. And I shot enough coverage in case I didn't.

I don't think it's wrong to want smaller equipment. If I need a crane, I bring the crane. I ALWAYS have my tripod for locked shots or shots where a pan or tilt is sufficient. No argument there.

I guess getting into the full blown steadicam rig is something I need to consider. Given the weight of my FS100 *might* be a little too much, that is really the only other choice in the matter if I want the freedom the blackbird gave me on shots.

I also need to look at putting my shoulder rig in a way that drops the camera down. With it at shoulder height, it makes no sense to me to use. I have to get down on my knee and then at that point, why not just use my sticks? I can move the tripod around just as fast as myself with the shoulder rig.

Maybe I just need a fancy belt buckle with a camera plate!! :) Then I can drink coffee while I shoot, no hands! :)

I can see this is something I am going to be exploring for awhile. I really think there has got to be some better ways to shoot with these smaller video cameras. I feel like I am just on the cusp of figuring out some better ways, but we'll see. Obviously I know I am NOT the first person to think this. I also think cameras are going to continue to get smaller and lighter as we move forward. Actually, I should say modular. I like that. I just think that the 'modular' part of it isn't really working yet. To really be modular, I think the FS100/AF100 should have had a shoulder mount option. A EVF that was movable, an LCD that was movable. Heck, even an imager that could be repositioned. I think this is the future and that will really make it to be what people want of their camera. If I don't want the EVF on the AF100, I would have loved to take it off just to make the camera not so tall.

In time.... :)
 
DDirector said:
I've seen one guy who was also tall set up a shoulder rig so that the camera was below his shoulders while the rig was still resting on his shoulder.
Most people set it up at eye level of the operator but adjusting it to be lower than usual is what (in your case) should be done.
Click to expand...

mewithtlr.jpg


What's old is new again.... try something like this! :happy:
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
Yeah some kind of cage or even a super cheap chinese rig with a top handle would work for that waist level stuff.

The main reasons you see so much handheld in narrative these days are
1. Laziness
2. Lack of knowledge of how to plan and shoot proper coverage
3. Laziness
4. The trendy idea that the camera floating all over the place somehow makes the shot more "dynamic".
5. Laziness
Click to expand...

Whilst in some cases you may be right - but blanketing handheld as a lazy option is simply not true. Something well thought out, something planned that utilises handheld for purpose falls in none of those categories. Doing great handheld is not an easy task. It requires extreme concentration.

The point is as always - as long as its motivated by the story.

Just one example - skip to 4:00

 
Boy we've gotten far afield from the OP, sorry for my part in that, lol.

On the camera drawing attention to itself, we have the same thing in editing. Modern NLEs have made it So easy to cut every 1.5 seconds and use every effect under the sun people think they should do it. The deliberative, thoughtful, motivated camera work and editing of the past is being replaced by "spray and pray". Throw everything you can think of against the wall and see if anything sticks.

And again, said it earlier. Handheld ABSOLUTELY can be the right choice and can be executed beautifully, but look at the 80% of stuff we see posted with the camera bobbing and weaving all over the place and tell me it falls in that category.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
but look at the 80% of stuff we see posted with the camera bobbing and weaving all over the place and tell me it falls in that category.
Click to expand...

Well theres the distinction. Whilst I do look at some of that stuff - I dont take it under consideration when posting. In those cases alone, your post is probably accurate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top